Milk Development Council

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the proposed increase of 60 per cent in the maximum levy chargeable by the Milk Development Council is justifiable in the present state of farming; and whether they will ask the National Audit Office to examine the finances of the council.

Baroness Hayman: Levy payers voted in favour of the increase when they were polled last autumn. The books of the Milk Development Council are always open to National Audit Office inspection. We see no need to ask it to undertake any specific examination.

E.coli 0157 Poisoning Outbreaks

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list, for each outbreak of E.coli 0157 in the last 10 years the origin of which has been traced to a particular farm:
	(a) the food product or other vector involved;
	(b) the size of the farm; and
	(c) whether the farm employed organic methods of food production.

Baroness Hayman: There were 24 outbreaks of E.coli 0157 poisoning traced to farms between 1991 and 1999. Of these, 12 were associated with animal contact, 11 with the consumption of dairy products, and one with environmental exposure. It has not been possible to provide the further information requested from the records of these outbreaks in the time available. I will write to the noble Lord on this matter as soon as possible.

Countryside Stewardship Scheme: Expansion

Earl Peel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the additional funds recently arranged by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food for increased spending on the Countryside Stewardship Scheme will result in a wider targeting of the scheme nationally or simply an increase within the present target areas.

Baroness Hayman: In the current application round, we expect to see many more applicants accepted into the scheme, both within existing target areas and elsewhere. Then in the autumn, as normal, the number and extent of these target areas will be reviewed in the light of future funding available.

Diazinon-based Sheep Dips

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any other chemicals are used as stablisers to prevent the development of TEPP and SULPHOTEPP in products containing diazinon as their active ingredient; and, if so, what they are.

Baroness Hayman: All diazinon-based sheep dips contain a stabiliser. The formulation of any authorised veterinary medicinal product is commercially sensitive and may not be revealed except with the agreement of the marketing authorisation holder. All veterinary medicinal products, as formulated, must satisfy statutory criteria of safety, quality and efficacy.

Pigmeat Labelling

The Earl of Shrewsbury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether their plans for Honest Labelling include the labelling of pigmeat and pigmeat products from European Union countries with words to the effect that "This product has not been produced in accordance with current United Kingdom animal welfare regulations"; and if not, why not.

Baroness Hayman: No.
	The Government favour positive labelling to highlight the advantages of British quality and animal welfare standards. Consumers who wish to support these standards tell us they actively choose foods that are marked as British. Following concerns that such labelling can sometimes mislead, we have consulted a wide range of interested parties and issued tough new guidance to industry and enforcement authorities. These make clear the need to ensure that country of origin markings on food labels do not mislead consumers about the true origin of the ingredients that have been used. We have also appointed a "verification officer" to work with industry bodies to identify cases where products are being sold at retail or catering level which may mislead the consumer into believing they contain pork of British origin when in fact it is imported. The verification officer's action has already had some impact on the labelling practices of retailers and at least two sets of misleading labels have already been withdrawn by two different retail groups.
	Welfare standards vary across the Community, although all products must comply with EU rules. The Government fully support the NFU initiative to develop a kitemark to help consumers identify quality assured products.

Film and Television Working Conditions

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 14 February (WA 131-132), which of the issues identified in the report A Survey on Working Conditions in the Film and Television Industry published in December 1999 by Women in Film and Television are being taken forward by the Minister for Tourism, Film and Broadcasting.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My honourable friend the Minister for Tourism, Film and Broadcasting has written to the main film and broadcasting organisations, including those representing employees and independents, to seek their views on the issues raised in the Women in Film and Television survey on working conditions in film and television. Once she has their responses, she will have further discussion with the Minister for Women and WiTF on how to progress matters.

Rough Sleeping

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Lord Whitty on 15 February (WA 142), whether rough sleeping is permitted (a) outside No. 10 Downing Street or (b) along Victoria Street, SW1.

Lord Whitty: Although it is not against the law to sleep rough, the Government think that it is wrong for anyone to have to sleep on the streets. We are currently putting in place a comprehensive package of measures to achieve our target of reducing rough sleeping by at least two-thirds by 2002. Efforts will be focused on those areas with the highest concentrations of rough sleepers, including Victoria Street, SW1.
	Access to Downing Street is restricted for security reasons.

Newspaper Licensing Agency: Photocopying Charges

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Under what statutory authority the Newspapers Licensing Authority charges organisations for photocopying press articles; and whether the legislation distinguishes between photocopying for internal use by an organisation's staff and sending copies to outside persons; and
	What statutory provision exists for the Newspaper Licensing Authority to make exemptions for charities from charges for photocopying press articles; and, if any, what is the statutory definition of a charity for this purpose.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Copyright law, as stated in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, provides protection for all original literary works, including press articles, and making copies of a work is one of the acts restricted by copyright. Some limited photocopying of all or part of a copyright work may fall within the scope of one or more of the exceptions to copyright and so would not need the licence of the copyright owner--for example, the exceptions covering fair dealing with a work for the purposes of research or private study, criticism or review, or the reporting of current events and the exceptions covering use of copyright works in judicial proceedings or statutory inquiries. No copyright exceptions are specifically directed at charities, so there is no statutory definition of what constitutes a charity in copyright law. Otherwise, statute does not distinguish between copying, including photocopying, for different purposes, leaving rights' owners and users free to negotiate appropriate royalties for a particular use, including use by charities.
	The Newspaper Licensing Agency (NLA) is a private organisation established by some owners of copyright in press articles to license photocopying collectively. Collecting societies like the NLA benefit both copyright owners who might otherwise find it difficult to license use of their work and users who might otherwise have to approach many different copyright owners for licences. However, in recognition of the monopoly position that collecting societies may hold, the terms and conditions offered by any collective licensing society can generally be referred by licensees or prospective licensees for independent adjudication by the Copyright Tribunal, a body established by the 1988 Act for this purpose.

Human Rights Joint Committee

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked the Leader of the House:
	How the proposed terms of reference of the Joint Committee on Human Rights will be approved.

Baroness Jay of Paddington: The terms of reference of the Joint Committee on Human Rights will be determined by orders of this House and another place.

House of Lords: GovernmentDefeats 1997-99

Lord Denham: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many times in the first two Sessions of this Parliament they were defeated in Divisions in the House of Lords on amendments at various stages of Bills; and on how many of these occasions have the outcomes (a) been accepted in principle in another place (b) reversed outright; or (c) resolved by the substitution of compromise amendments.

Lord Carter: In 1997-98, there were 36 government defeats in the House of Lords. In 1998-99 there were 29 such defeats. In the cases where another place proposed an amendment in lieu, it is a matter of interpretation as to whether that amendment constituted acceptance in principle or whether it represented a compromise, and it is therefore not possible to distinguish absolutely between categories (a) and (c) in the noble Lord's question. However, it is possible to give the following figures in relation to government defeats in the House of Lords.
	
		1997-98 
		
			   
			 Defeats wholly accepted by another place 0 
			 Defeats reversed by another place 24 
			 Defeats resolved by amendments in lieu 8 
		
	
	In addition, three amendments in lieu were proposed by another place on the European Parliamentary Elections Bill. These were all rejected by the Lords, and the Bill was eventually lost.
	
		1998-99
		
			   
			 Defeats wholly accepted by another place 1 (Employment Relations Bill Committee stage, Amendment  No. 276) 
			 Defeats reversed by another place 22 
			 Defeats resolved by amendments in lieu 3 
		
	
	In addition there were two defeats on the House of Lords Bill (hostile Motion on Second Reading and a Motion to resume the House) which were not referred back to another place. There was also a defeat on Second Reading of the European Parliamentary Elections Bill, which was not referred back to another place as it caused the Bill to be enacted under the Parliament Acts.

Commonwealth of Australia: Centenary

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to celebrate the centenary of the Australian colonies becoming the Commonwealth of Australia on 1 January 2001.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The centenary of the Commonwealth of Australia is an important event. My honourable friend the Minister of State, John Battle, announced in Sydney on 25 February that Her Majesty's Government is contributing A$400,000 to a UK-Australian project to create, as part of the centenary celebrations, a permanent park at Magna Carta Place in Canberra's parliamentary triangle. This will be a celebration of Australia's democracy and Britain's fundamental contribution to it.
	I also refer to the oral Answer I gave the House on 17 January in reply to a Question from Baroness Gardner of Parkes.

Act of Union: Bicentenary

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 7 February (WA 60), what consultations were undertaken and what factors were taken into account in the development of policy on the celebration of the bicentenary of the creation of the United Kingdom; and why the Foreign and Commonweath Office answers for this policy area.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The noble Lord's earlier Question touched on the responsibilities of a number of departments, including the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Northern Ireland Office and the Cabinet Office. As is normal in such cases, relevant departments were consulted over the draft reply.

Chechnya: Oil Wells and Pipelines

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have had any communication from the Russian Government or any independent information, about the condition of the oil wells in Chechnya.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We have received no communication from the Russian Government, or from any independent source, providing information about the condition of the oil wells in Chechnya.

Chechnya: Oil Wells and Pipelines

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, to their knowledge, either the Russian Government or the local authorities in Chechnya have asked for any outside assistance with the handling of the oil wells or oil pipelines in Chechnya.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: So far as the Government are aware, neither the Russian nor local Chechen authorities have asked for outside assistance with the handling of the oil wells or oil pipelines in Chechnya.

Chechnya: Oil Wells and Pipelines

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to make aid to Chechnya conditional upon inspection of the oil wells and pipelines in that country.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The UK Government have already given £1.4 million to the ICRC and UN emergency appeals for Chechnya, and also contributed via the EU emergency action of 1.2 million euro. To date all UK financial aid has been given for humanitarian assistance, to relieve the suffering of the people of Chechnya. It would not be appropriate to make this, or any further UK aid, conditional on the inspection of Chechen oil wells and pipelines.

Relations with Communist Regimes

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any Ministers have expressed sympathy, support or understanding for the communist regimes in China, North Korea or the former Soviet Union.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Where formal relations exist between Her Majesty's Government and other governments, these are conducted on the basis of mutual respect, whatever differences of view exist. Her Majesty's Government continue to attach the highest importance to the observance of universal human rights and the development of fully democratic institutions.

European Commissioners: Immunity

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	For how long after they leave office the diplomatic immunity of the European Commissioners lasts; in respect of which territories such immunity operates; and in respect of which alleged offences.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The immunity from legal proceedings enjoyed by European Commissioners extends only to acts performed by them in their official capacity, including words spoken or written. Commissioners are entitled to such immunity in the territory of each member state and continue to enjoy this immunity after they have ceased to hold office.

Adverse Drug Reactions

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many deaths and how many serious adverse reactions there have been from unlicensed herbal medicines, homoeopathic medicines and vitamin and mineral supplements; and how these figures compare with deaths and serious adverse reactions to licensed pharmaceutical medicines since 1990.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Yellow Card Scheme provides for voluntary reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions (ADRs) by general practitioners, hospital doctors, dentists, coroners and pharmacists. The Medicines Control Agency (MCA) receives approximately 17,000-18,000 United Kingdom reports of suspected adverse reactions to all medicines each year, of which 55 per cent are serious and 3 per cent are fatal. A report of a suspected reaction does not necessarily mean that it was caused by the medicine. As the scheme is voluntary, not all adverse reactions are reported.
	The Yellow Card Scheme was extended to include unlicensed herbal remedies in October 1996. Since then the MCA/Committee on Safety of Medicines (CSM) has received 119 serious reports of ADRs associated with the use of herbal remedies, 55 of which are for unlicensed remedies. None was fatal.
	In the same period, 209 reports of serious ADRs associated with vitamin and mineral supplements (excluding injectable supplements) were received through the Yellow Card Scheme, 11 of which were fatal. These fatal reports are confounded by a number of factors including underlying conditions and other medicines. There is no system to record adverse reactions and deaths from food supplements.
	Suspected adverse drug reactions reported to the CSM are recorded according to the active drug substance and reports for homoeopathic medicines are not specifically identified as such. It is therefore not possible to provide a list of reported ADRs to homoeopathic medicines.
	Herbal medicines, homoeopathic medicines and vitamin and mineral supplements are often supplied without prescription and are not taken on the advice of a doctor or pharmacist, practitioners capable of submitting Yellow Card reports. It is generally recognised that the reporting rate for medicines supplied over the counter is lower than that of suspected adverse reactions associated with prescription medicines. Therefore, data obtained on suspected adverse reactions associated with herbal medicines, homoeopathic medicines and vitamin and mineral supplements through the Yellow Card Scheme cannot be directly compared to reporting for licensed pharmaceutical medicines.

NHS Cochlear Implant Services

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the statement by Baroness Hayman on 17 June 1999 (H.L. Deb., col. 446), what progress had been made towards including cochlear implant services in the list of National Health Service specialised services.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: There are no current plans to amend the list of specialised services issued with previous guidance. The list is intended to act as a working brief for National Health Service regional offices to use in reviewing current service arrangements over time and does not preclude action being taken on any service if appropriate.

NHS Cochlear Implant Services

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the statement by Baroness Hayman on 17 June 1999 (H.L. Deb., col. 447) that users should be "involved in the development of the new arrangements and have confidence in them", what are the arrangements to ensure potential and actual users of cochlear implant services and specialist mental health services for deaf people are consulted.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Since the new commissioning arrangements were introduced in April 1999 there have been no major reviews by commissioners of either the cochlear implant service or the specialist mental health service for the deaf, but the Department of Health is in regular touch with the Royal National Institute for Deaf People and the National Deaf Children's Society.
	The National Service Framework for Mental Health, published in September 1999, draws attention to the benefits of involving service users and carers in the planning and delivery of services. The new NHS Performance Framework, against which future service performance will be assessed, sets out six performance domains, the fifth of which is patient/user experience.

NHS Specialised Services: Annual Reports

Lord Clement-Jones: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the statement by Baroness Hayman on 17 June 1999 (H.L. Deb., col. 447), when and in what form the first annual reports, to be published locally on the new regional specialised commissioning arrangements, will be made public; and what guidance has been given to commissioning bodies about what details the reports should contain.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The first annual reports on the new regional arrangements for commissioning specialised services will be published locally this summer and a full set of the eight reports will be made available in the Library. Advice has been given on the structure and content of the annual reports and, once finalised, a copy of the advice will be placed in the Library.
	The National Specialist Commissioning Advisory Group, which deals nationally with some of the most specialised services of all, including specialised mental health services for deaf children, already produces an annual report in the autumn. This will be extended to cover national lessons emerging from the regional arrangements so that there is a comprehensive and readily accessible account available. A copy will also be placed in the Library.

Independent Living Fund: Client Contribution

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is currently the maximum weekly payment made for his or her care by any client of the Independent Living Fund who is in employment; and what weekly income he or she is left with after payment.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The highest known current weekly payment 1 is made by a client of the Independent Living (Extension) Fund who is contributing £275.26 towards the cost of the care package. The Fund's payment is £152.29 per week and the client's remaining weekly income is £219.67.
	The changes to the earnings disregard which my honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State announced on 27 January should improve the position of this client, and many others. Based on the current information held by the Fund, under the new rules the Fund's contribution would increase to £228.29 per week, while the client's contribution would reduce to £198.76 and the remaining weekly income increase to £296.10. Note: 1 Based on the 80 per cent of ILF customers for whom the relevant records are computerised and can therefore be scanned at proportionate cost.

Learning and Skills Local Councils

Lord Woolmer of Leeds: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will announce their plans for the location of the local arms of the Learning and Skills Council.

Baroness Blackstone: I announced in October 1999 the boundaries of the 47 local arms of the Learning and Skills Council. I am today announcing, subject to the passage of the legislation to set up the Learning and Skills Council, the location of the offices of the local councils. In reaching decisions, I have taken account of the need to get best value for public money by using, where appropriate, premises currently occupied by Training and Enterprise Councils, and of the need for locations that will facilitate effective operations of the LSC.
	The announcement relates to England only. Letters giving details have today been sent to all MPs with English constituencies, the contents of which have been placed in the Library.

Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998, Sections 5-7: Review

Baroness Rendell of Babergh: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have appointed a reviewer for those sections of the Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998 which are not already included in the existing review of anti-terrorism legislation.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: My right honourable friend the Home Secretary is pleased to announce that Mr John Rowe QC has accepted my invitation to carry out the annual review of Sections 5 to 7 of the Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998, which deal with conspiracy in this country to commit criminal offences abroad.

Asylum Decisions: Improvement of Procedures

Baroness Rendell of Babergh: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they are taking to address delays in the asylum decision-making process.

Lord Bassam of Brighton: The Government are devoting great effort and substantial additional resources into the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) in Croydon to reduce the backlogs there and to deliver faster decisions as part of the commitment to delivering a fairer, faster and firmer immigration and asylum system. The asylum system we inherited required a radical overhaul to the processes used in making asylum decisions and the legislative basis for appeals to deliver these faster.
	The Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, now on the Statute Book will help to achieve this. Its provisions will be introduced progressively, but a fairer and faster system cannot be delivered by legislation alone.
	One of our actions was to undertake a thorough review of the asylum decision making processes. Vantagepoint was commissioned by the IND to help with its review of the asylum decision process. The aim of the review was to identify where there were delays in the procedures which might affect the ability of the IND and the Lord Chancellor's Department's to achieve the White Paper targets, and to make recommendations for change.
	A number of ways in which IND could improve its procedures and introduce more flexibility into the asylum decision-making process were identified and are being implemented as part of a systematic overhaul of the asylum business.
	Changes that have already been made include the following:
	In this year and the next two years, we are investing a minimum of £120 million in IND, including an extra £60 million on speeding up casework. Hundreds more staff are being deployed as caseworkers. Output in the Integrated Casework Directorate (ICD) is improving and staffing levels remain under review to ensure that output targets are met. There has already been a significant increase in asylum productivity as our new recruits to asylum decision making gain experience, and we expect this to continue;
	Ports and the ICD are jointly taking forward the implementation of streamlined processes aimed at ensuring as far as possible consistency in the processes for handling asylum casework. A new Statement of Evidence Form has been introduced for use by both the ports and the ICD, where appropriate;
	Outside consultants are currently training existing staff and new staff in effective and efficient interview skills;
	All health and safety issues concerning interview rooms have been addressed and resolved. Safety alarms have been issued to all interviewing staff and guards are readily available; and
	Country policy advice is being systematically reviewed. There is a full library of country information available for the top asylum producing countries and short country background briefs are, additionally, being provided in a consistent format. A chief caseworker post has been created with particular focus on co-ordinating needs of asylum caseworkers for country policy advice.
	We are also committed to achieving the targets set out in the White Paper published in July 1998 to deliver most initial asylum decisions within two months and most appeals within a further four months. The White Paper target is to do this by April 2001. For families with children we are already meeting the targets.
	We are taking measures to reduce the backlog of cases in IND dating from 1996 onwards. The rate at which we do this will be dependent on a wide range of variables, not least of which will be future application rates, but we remain committed to the White Paper target of reducing the backlog of initial asylum decisions to fractional levels by April 2001. We expect to make major inroads into this backlog by the end of the year.
	Other actions taken include piloting new procedures in respect of both port and in-country asylum applications. Measures have been introduced which aim to obtain the maximum amount of information at the outset. These, together with enhanced computer links between ports and IND in Croydon, have reduced the stages and time in the decision making process.
	Copies of the report dated July 1999 by consultants Vantagepoint (formerly called BDO Stoy Hayward) on the asylum decision-making process has been placed in the Library.